Higby Wants Your Thoughts on Iron Sights for FPS..... - Page 10

SKYeXile · 2012-01-09, 02:07 AM

Originally Posted by Elude

Quakelive and Tribes Ascend don't use server side hit detection, if they do then I must obviously be misunderstanding what it means. To word it better, both those games simulate a zero latency scenario, you don't need to lead your target with a hit scan weapon like you would with serverside hit detection.

If it they were using a form of server side hit detection (using my understanding of it in case I'm wrong) there would be no anomalies in shot registration, but instead there would be delays in the shot instead, and ultimately forcing you to lead with even non projectile based weapons.

Also clientside hit detection (again to my understanding of it) doesn't just affect hitscan, but projectile weapons also, you can see this easily in other games that use clientside hit detection. Meaning it doesn't matter if PS2 used hitscan weapons or projectile weapons, they would still get the same treatment.

TBH i actually dont know what quake live uses for hit detection, i presumed SSHD been an arena style game. Hi res are inbreds and used stock standard unreal SSHD in an MMO, so i presumed they would use it in tribes ascend, guess they learnt their lesson? All unreal engines use standard serverside hit detection where you need to compensate for your latency by adjusting your fire.

I guess now im not entirely sure what you meant by visual anomaly when a person using a hitscan weapon fires at somebody using CSHD. obviously they're further ahead on the server to what youre seeing them at and they're even further ahead on their client. so when you kill somebody their corpse would warp to where they were on their client when you kill them...like what happens in planetside.

are you referring to that? because on you're screen i would think everything looks fine.

Yea clientside hit detection is the same as a zeroping scenario, its one of the points of it...and not overloading the server.

Matt has said that planetside will be the same as BF3 a client/server hybrid...tbh i dont know how BF3 works either...but i know a hit on my screen is a hit, so i dont really care beyond that.

Elude · 2012-01-09, 02:41 AM

I'm referring to landing a railgun shot in Quakelive directly on a player and doing zero damage because they were actually a step ahead of your shot, this happens in Tribes ascend also with even projectile weapons.

This is the visual anomaly I'm referring to.

SKYeXile · 2012-01-09, 02:53 AM

Originally Posted by Elude

I'm referring to landing a railgun shot in Quakelive directly on a player and doing zero damage because they were actually a step ahead of your shot, this happens in Tribes ascend also with even projectile weapons.

This is the visual anomaly I'm referring to.

Sounds like serverside hit detection to me, sure its simulating zero ping? a hit on your screen should be a hit...except on planetside on emerald...packets like to go...missing...often.

i cant find anything on google on what those 2 games are running on, tribes ascend is running on Unreal though, I really don't think Hi res are going to change it(the netcode model), its not in their capacity.

Elude · 2012-01-09, 03:08 AM

I own both UT3 and Tribes ascend and their netcode is completely different. You don't have to lead hitscan weapons whatsoever in Tribes Ascend, not even with 200 ping (atleast not hitscan weapons lol). Yet in UT3 you do unless you're using some clientside hit detection mod like UTComp.

Serverside hit detection doesn't have unregistered shot anomalies, when something lands it lands, the bad part is that you had to lead your shot. You have it all backwards, in UT3 you don't have these anomalies (again unless you're using UTComp) instead you have to lead your targets (which sucks).

Stock Quake 3 netcode is the same way, there are no miss hits, but you have to lead. Quakelive on the other hand you don't have to lead but you have a chance of having a shot registration error.

If the game is fast and you have clientside hit detection you are going to experience shot registration errors than you would if the game was slow with clientside hit detection. Cod4 in comparison to Quakelive or Tribes Ascend is a perfect example of this.

Hell you don't even need to compare any other game, you could simply just walk around in quakelive with a friend and take shots at eachother and you'll see your chances of miss hits decrease, but once you start picking up speed by strafe jumping around the map, and playing the way the game intended you to, you will all of a sudden start to notice tons of miss hits.

SKYeXile · 2012-01-09, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by Elude

You have it all backwards,

No, i have it right, its 2012, a hit on my screen should be a hit, shouldn't have to lead a target due to ping anymore with SSHD or CSHD, if developers cant get SSHD right now, especially when their game mode is sub 32 players, then they should goto Valve for some education.

I have never had any bad experiences with CSHD...bar hackers in planetside and issues on emerald where i get packet loss, never felt like my shots were doing nothing on Markov where I had 0.0% packet loss.

SKYeXile · 2012-01-09, 03:31 AM

Hrm im, reading now that while most people state that BF3 is is Clinetside hit detection(apparently) further reading shows that its server side hit detection with hit prediction, what valve use. and it all falls into place...(this si what people say, makes sense...gotta keep the hackers at bay)

Smedly has previously stated that while planetside uses one hit detection model(CSHD), PS2 will use the other(clearly SSHD) and higby had stated more recently that PS2 will use the same netcode as BF3, it makes perfect sense....it didn't before because apparently BF3 used CSHD.

Obviously most people believe BF3 is clientside, it is, arguably, but the hit is confirmed on the server so it would seem as far as i'm, Valve and smedly are concerned its SSHD.

This is interesting then, Source has issues running 32 players @ 30 ticks per second, I wonder how SOE plan to compensate with 2000 using similar netcode?

I Really should make a new thread.

Elude · 2012-01-09, 03:36 AM

I've landed direct hits on players in Quakelive, CoD4 and Tribes Ascend that have done zero damage while having zero packetloss, and only 80 ping. But this isn't even my argument, my argument is that the speed of the game actually affects hit detection.

They all have hit detection anomalies, but the faster the game, the more noticeable they will be. I've honestly seen more hit detection issues in modern games then I have in older games. (where I've actually witness none other then having to lead)

I'm all for client side hit detection, I would much rather have a chance of a miss even if I landed the shot than having to lead my shot on a weapon that was designed to hit instantly. I'm just showing that when it comes to clientside hit detection, it does have it's disadvantages over serverside hit detection, and it is far from perfect.

Elude · 2012-01-09, 03:39 AM

I always figured if you're simulating clientside hit detection then it's more than likely clientside netcode, but if thats the case in your research of BF3 then maybe its not

.

My point I still think is valid though, simulated clientside or entirely clientside, you're still going to get anomalies in hit detection.

SKYeXile · 2012-01-09, 03:49 AM

Originally Posted by Elude

I've landed direct hits on players in Quakelive, CoD4 and Tribes Ascend that have done zero damage while having zero packetloss, and only 80 ping. But this isn't even my argument, my argument is that the speed of the game actually affects hit detection.

They all have hit detection anomalies, but the faster the game, the more noticeable they will be. I've honestly seen more hit detection issues in modern games then I have in older games. (where I've actually witness none other then having to lead)

I'm all for client side hit detection, I would much rather have a chance of a miss even if I landed the shot than having to lead my shot on a weapon that was designed to hit instantly. I'm just showing that when it comes to clientside hit detection, it does have it's disadvantages over serverside hit detection, and it is far from perfect.

For the sake of argument, just say I'm right and quakelive cod4 and tribes acsend use SSHD with hit prediction then yes i beleive you could run into issues with hit detection, because the timesmap may not be totally in sync.

this is a image from CCS.

Valve explain it best:

This screenshot was taken on a listen server with 200 milliseconds of lag (using net_fakelag), right after the server confirmed the hit. The red hitbox shows the target position on the client where it was 100ms + interp period ago. Since then, the target continued to move to the left while the user command was travelling to the server. After the user command arrived, the server restored the target position (blue hitbox) based on the estimated command execution time. The server traces the shot and confirms the hit (the client sees blood effects).

Client and server hitboxes don't exactly match because of small precision errors in time measurement. Even a small difference of a few milliseconds can cause an error of several inches for fast-moving objects. Multiplayer hit detection is not pixel perfect and has known precision limitations based on the tickrate and the speed of moving objects. Increasing the tickrate does improve the precision of hit detection, but also requires more CPU, memory, and bandwidth capacity for server and clients.

The question arises, why is hit detection so complicated on the server? Doing the back tracking of player positions and dealing with precision errors while hit detection could be done client-side way easier and with pixel precision. The client would just tell the server with a "hit" message what player has been hit and where. We can't allow that simply because a game server can't trust the clients on such important decisions. Even if the client is "clean" and protected by Valve Anti-Cheat, the packets could be still modified on a 3rd machine while routed to the game server. These "cheat proxies" could inject "hit" messages into the network packet without being detected by VAC (a "man-in-the-middle" attack).

Network latencies and lag compensation can create paradoxes that seem illogical compared to the real world. For example, you can be hit by an attacker you can't even see anymore because you already took cover. What happened is that the server moved your player hitboxes back in time, where you were still exposed to your attacker. This inconsistency problem can't be solved in general because of the relatively slow packet speeds. In the real world, you don't notice this problem because light (the packets) travels so fast and you and everybody around you sees the same world as it is right now.

So yes, you're correct upping the movement speed if SOE use this from of serverside hit detection, with hit prediction will cause inconsistency with hits.

IF however they were to use full clinetside hit detection(like planetside) these issues would not be possible since a hit on your screen is a hit(unless the packet goes missing) but this in turn leaves the game to be plagued with hackers.

Im not saying im right on the "Severside hit detection with hit prediction" terminology, but i believe this is the issue you're talking about and seeing.

I really believe this sever side hit prediction code is the best code. while you do die around corners, all players aim at the target on their screen and a hit is generally a hit, and if this is the code they're using then the less erratic movement would be better(lets not make it a crawl though hey?) this code off course leaves lesser options for hackers and im 99% positive with the info we have that this is the code SOE are using.

Grimster · 2012-01-09, 03:50 AM

I have never liked iron sights.

I think it is a great addition if realism is what you are aiming for but in my opinion using COF instead makes shooter games more fun to play.

I will probably play PS2 no matter if there are iron sights in there or not. But I am quite confident that I would enjoy a PS2 without iron sights more, simply because no shooter game utilizing iron sights have managed to appeal to me more than any of the other shooter games not using it that I have played through the years.

Like someone else pointed out earlier iron sights in real life fill a totally different function but it is a whole other thing in a virtual world being seen on a screen.

The day that we play games in full 3D with googles or whatever and all that I am sure that iron sights would make a excellent feature in shooter games.

Elude · 2012-01-09, 04:08 AM

Thank you for finding that SKYeXile.

Technically most games, old and new are serverside based but many newer games use a form of clientside trickery to simulate zero ping, which is exactly the type of system I've been seeing hit detection issues with. I'm not against this at all but it does leave faster moving targets more open for such errors.

Full clientside netcode I suppose wouldn't have any anomalies and it would simulate zero ping but as you say it would be more prone to hackers. I think I'll take my chance with shots not registering than I will with having hackers in a game.

Sighpolice · 2012-01-09, 07:16 AM

Imho Halo:CE Has the best weapons I've used in a looong time. None of them had these generic waste of gameplay "iron sights".

The gauss is an amazing gun, I still regard it as one of the most fun and enjoyable guns to use from any game. That didn't need iron sights. Fact.

I kinda dislike how PlanetSide 2 is almost copying other games because it's "the fashion".. it's quite pathetic.. I don't think developers fully understand why Call of Duty & BF series "sell so well" - It's because we have fuck all else to play.. Nobody has produced a decent shooter in years that doesn't try to copy CoD/BF.. so of course the trend shows "people buy games like CoD" not because they want to.. it's because developers have lost their souls just want to make easy money *cough BF3*

Stevo IRL · 2012-01-09, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by Sighpolice

Imho Halo:CE Has the best weapons I've used in a looong time. None of them had these generic waste of gameplay "iron sights".

The gauss is an amazing gun, I still regard it as one of the most fun and enjoyable guns to use from any game. That didn't need iron sights. Fact.

I kinda dislike how PlanetSide 2 is almost copying other games because it's "the fashion".. it's quite pathetic.. I don't think developers fully understand why Call of Duty & BF series "sell so well" - It's because we have fuck all else to play.. Nobody has produced a decent shooter in years that doesn't try to copy CoD/BF.. so of course the trend shows "people buy games like CoD" not because they want to.. it's because developers have lost their souls just want to make easy money *cough BF3*

How is adding ironsights "fashionable". I very much doubt they sat around in the office going "Damn we need hundreds of thousands of people playing this game but we are seriously lacking one key feature that will really pull in the masses", " I know lets add in iron sights".

Any other features of PS2 that we won't enjoy ? Seeing as you seem to know more about the thought process of the developers then even themselves.

Sighpolice · 2012-01-09, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by Stevo IRL

How is adding ironsights "fashionable". I very much doubt they sat around in the office going "Damn we need hundreds of thousands of people playing this game but we are seriously lacking one key feature that will really pull in the masses", " I know lets add in iron sights".

Any other features of PS2 that we won't enjoy ? Seeing as you seem to know more about the thought process of the developers then even themselves.

Haha, well yeah I see iron sights like Ipads, just some accessory you don't actually need.. Why do we need them if not for the general masses and because other games have them? A trait which is pretty much used by fashion is it not? X model wears this, that months clothes all look like X model because it's "popular"? We didn't have them in PlanetSide 1 did we...

And I don't see what you mean by that, if anything I was taking a dig at the developers of BF3, not PS2... ?

Coreldan · 2012-01-09, 07:57 AM

The way I see it is that it's direct evolution to gaming. It's almost like you are saying that there shouldn't have been ever any new features added into modern games, we should just go with what we had back in 2003 and so.

To me it's a feature as games evolved, much like we're seeing nice stuff such as vaulting as opposed to having to hump-jump ourselves over knee high objects.

But yeah, it really depends how the ironsighting is made. BF3 didn't make it all that well as just about all weapons are forced to ironsight to hit anything.